From: Matthew Glesne (mglesne_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 2004-07-06 06:13:54
Steve,
If you didn't want to go off about Castro again, you
might have restrained from the slander about his
"pillaging" the Cuban people and misinformation about
migrants. The millionaire claim comes from the
Capitalist mouthpiece Forbes, who had Sadaam's
offshore accounts listed right above Castro. The
Saddam claims have been proven false and the Castro
claims are not taken seriously by anyone who is
remotely impartial. You can have many gripes about
Cuba's socialism but corruption has never ever been
part of the equation. And lets hope we can have a
President or Senator one day who is not a
multi-millionaire or beholden to special interests.
Your other point about the 60,000 Cubans who've died
is also way off base. The facts are: Cubans - despite
living just 90 miles away from Key West AND being the
world's only residents to be given automatic green
cards (and job training, education and housing
assistance) upon touching one of the Keys ARE NOT the
largest migrant population found at sea. Check the US
Coast Guard figures - 912 Cubans were found at sea
thus far in 2004, compared to 9,000 people from other
countries - mostly Haitians and Dominicans from much
farther away. More Ecuadorians were found off Florida
than Cubans in the last 2 years forgodsake! I
shouldn't have to mention the hundreds of thousands of
Mexicans who make the trek across the Sonora desert
each year... I couldn't find how many have died making
the trip, but you might think a bit about the carrot
we dangle in front of the nose of Cubans when
contemplating these tragedies. Also, there are only a
million Cubans in the US today - including pre-1959
migrants, as well as the US born children - so 3
million exiles is also bad information.
So it is not simply greed that motivates defectors.
Other factors include the US blockade which makes it a
crime for any store in the US to sell a Cuban made CD.
It is also a crime for a US company to do business
with any foreign record label that signs a Cuban
artist (helms-burton). I can understand how this might
prompt one to think about leaving. But a musician
making a living in Cuba is not hard (nor is finding
toothpaste or other basic supplies). Cuban musicians -
and all artists - are allowed to keep their profits -
and many live lavish lifestyles today. Arturo has done
nothing of note since leaving Irakere.
Your other point, seemingly against musical education,
is more esoteric and Mark answered it better than I
could. But I would certainly say that the US needs
better musical education, not less. The distinction
being that we need more base education for the masses.
Once you get to the point of Juliard, I might actually
agree, that you should experiment and leave the theory
behind.
But this is a crucial difference between our
arguments. You seem to be much more concerned about
the fate of the best and brightest. Socialism concerns
itself with broad quality education for the masses and
believes this is 1) more democratic and 2) will
produce a more authentic artform. True capitialists
believe that musical education is only worthwhile if
the market buys its product.. meaning that we should
be teaching Usher's "yeah." Luckily we have a little
bit of socialism left in public education - those with
the budgets to afford it.
Happy farce of july to all. Hopefully I will be able
to wave the flag with pride once again before I die.
But as long as there are more than a thousand benefit
concerts for musicians without health insurance a
year, this will not be happening (read this weekend in
the Las Vegas newspaper).
Matt
--- Steve <scatanzaro4_at_cox.net> wrote:
> yeah mark... i knew someone would bring this up.
>
> the "look @ damn britney" argument.
>
> capitalists don't sweat it if people that the
> cogniscenti deem
> "unworthy," i.e. britney, avril, and the like, are
> making their money.
>
> capitalism allows "some" musicians to make money.
> socialism spreads the
> misery around so everyone gets to share.
>
> check 1 of your own playlists, mark. without the
> "fancy, hi-tech
> equipment" (i.e., a sampler, turntables, pc and some
> software) there
> would be no kyoto jazz massive, bugz in the attic, 4
> hero, zero 7, and
> whatever "nu-jazz" u care to mention, at least, not
> as we know it now.
>
> and, you're view on capitalism making it harder to
> make music seems very
> old-fashioned. my main point in starting the thread
> is that capitalism
> has made "fancy, hi-tech equipment" de riguer and
> CHEAP. hell, 15 years
> ago, making your own digital recording was like a
> dream... only frank
> zappa and sting could do it... now, anyone with an
> old e-machine and
> magix software can be ready to go. that's less than
> 300 bucks, and a 16
> year old can earn that slinging pizzas for a couple
> months. that's the
> REALITY. (of course in cuba, that's about 3 years
> income, but yeah...
> schools are free.)
>
> it is a MYTH that capitalism makes it harder to make
> music. It denies
> the reality of what's happening at best buy or
> circuit city this very
> instant, i.e., some kid is buying a $79 piece of
> software that, when
> coupled with his mom's 3 year old computer, will
> have more functionality
> in it than the $500,000 synclavier that sting used
> on "synchronicity."
>
> mark, its true u don't need any of this stuff to
> make music, and u don't
> need an internet to distribute it, and u don't even
> need electricity,
> for that matter. u can just play congas, if u like.
> But if u play the
> congas in a forest and nobody hears u, did u make a
> sound? isn't part of
> making music sharing it with other people? this is
> another place,
> distribution, where socialism totally drops the
> ball. capitalism has
> made life lots easier for lots of musicians, whether
> they appreciate it
> or not.
>
> btw... let's talk about the charts and the lack of
> talent... the 2 top
> selling artists out there right now are norah jones
> and usher. u may not
> like their music... but do u really want to argue
> they have no talent?
>
> besides that, look closer at the reality of the
> music business. Do u
> really think everyone associated with a britney
> spears record is no
> talent? britney is one piece of the puzzle. do u
> think the neptunes have
> no talent? there are a lot of *very* talented people
> who are able to do
> just what u say u want, i.e. put some money in the
> bank so they can make
> their own music, just becuz they did a record date
> or a tour w. someone
> like britney or justin or (gasp) barry manilow.
>
> and, go back and look at the pop charts of the 30's,
> 40's, 50's, and
> etc... see how many songs that were big hits in
> their day were
> completely whack tunes with a shelf life of about 18
> months. to say that
> pop only sucks now is not historically accurate.
>
> and finally, saying u blame the lousy state of pop
> music on capitalism
> is kind of silly... because if there wasn't any
> capitalism, there
> wouldn't even BE any pop music.
>
>
>
>